Public Safety

I am bothered by what I have read about two recently-introduced bills, SB 425 by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-OH and its House version, HR 875 by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. I understand that these would establish a new Food Safety Administration (FSA) to "protect the public health" and "ensure the safety of food." This new bureaucracy would not replace the FDA but add to that already bloated bureaucracy. Apparently, current laws governing food safety are not enough.

As it is currently written, this bill would give FSA inspectors the right to enter, anywhere in the world, any premises of any food establishment to inspect and determine whether the product of that food establishment should be sold to American consumers. A "food establishment" is any "facility...that processes food or a facility that hold, stores, or transports food or food ingredients." There is also language about a "food production facility" that is "any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding facility." The bill empowers the new FSA to promulgate regulations further defining what "food" is, and regulating the manner of its growth, processing and delivery to the consumer. If you produce this "food," you will have to provide the paperwork to document that you produced it according to the regulations of the FSA. If not, under the House version, a $1,000,000 fine is levied for each infraction of the "rules" or "orders" of the FSA for each day that such infractions are deemed to exist by the FSA. The Senate version provides for a fine of $100,000 for each violation of any order or regulation of the FSA and for each day that such violation occurs.

I believe that small farmers and food processors would be forced out of business or at least forced to raise their prices if these bills were passed into law. I can think of a few such businesses. North Texas is known for its peach and pecan farms. There's the Red River Farm Trails Peach Festival at Tucker Farms in the Charlie-Thornberry area. I remember going to apple orchards in the St. Louis area as a child with my grandparents. Most small towns, such as Wichita Falls, have a farmer's market. Even some big cities have one, such as St. Louis' Soulard Market. East Texas has many chicken farms run by individuals or families who raise chickens for Pilgrim's Pride. (No, they don't raise all of their own chickens.) I saw fish and crawfish farms in Louisiana when I lived there some 10 years ago. These businesses would probably find it difficult to keep up with these additional regs without passing on costs to consumers. Potentially any individual who sells or even freely shares the bounty of their home garden would be under this bill's jurisdiction.

This is reminiscent of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) which became law last fall and went into effect 2/10/09. It was passed in response to the Chinese lead scare. According to a 3/5/09 report from TheHill.com, youth ATV dealers, libraries, thrift stores and bicycle makers are among the constituencies worried that they may be affected. Joe Martyak, the Consumer Product Safety Commission chief of staff said that they have received “thousands and thousands and thousands” of complaints about the new law. The Coalition for Safe and Affordable Childrenswear, a New York-based group, said manufacturers will have to take back $500,000,000 worth of children’s products under the new law. Steve Burnside, who owns DSD Kawasaki and RV Sales in Parkersburg, West Virginia said two manufacturers told him to pull their youth ATVs and motorbikes off the showroom floor out of fear their products would be out of compliance with the new law. “This segment is a big portion of our business,” Burnside said. He estimates sales may eventually fall off 40 percent due to the new restriction, which compounds the sales decline his business had already experienced due to the poor economy. Ed Krenik, a Bracewell & Giuliani (that is former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani) lobbyist for the Coalition for Safe and Responsible ATV Use, said dealerships also feel they can’t repair already sold ATVs because some of the components may not comply with the new lead standards.

Why is it when we the people create and innovate during tough economic times and naturally devise a solution to the problems mostly created by the federal government, that same government feels compelled to intervene once again? It seems as though they cannot stand us doing something without their approval. I really do not believe that they care for the "public safety" nearly as much as they want to control our lives. The "public good" term or "general welfare" clause has been stretched to the point of hurting people's pocketbooks. That's not a statement of greed but simply a statement supporting every person's right to support themselves as the Bible mandates. The unintended consequences of the CPSIA are not long in coming to fruition. Should this law and its results not be seriously considered before rushing into another similar law?

While I do not support the proposed food bill or the current CPSIA law, I suppose that they are both justified under the commerce clause of the U.S. Consitution. I would rather the states experiment with such legislation for the following reason: if it works out, then individuals and businesses will flock to that state; if it's a "trainwreck", then individuals and businesses will leave. The founders envisioned such a system. Allow the states to experiment so that the whole nation doesn't have to suffer the consequences of a bad law. While I'm a little fuzzy on what the commerce clause allows, I do know that the Constitution guarantees each state a republican form of government. What good are state laws if there are federal laws to trump each one of those unique state laws?